(Update: Now that the race is over, I've evaluated my postdictions!)
Why is this a postview? Well, it can't be a preview because the meet is over. It ended at about 4pm today. And it's not a review because I'm not summarizing the results of the meet. What I'm doing is unique. I'm publishing an account of the races today, filled with insanely accurate predictions (assuming they are correct) and commentary on how the race unfolds, after the race itself.
The skeptics among you are no doubt saying, "Oh, he probably just watched the race and then made those 'predictions'." To which I say, "They are called 'postdictions'." Thank you very much. And I arrived at them through the amazing power of remote viewing, which you can learn more about from this crazy book. (Note: wow.)
Actually, like most people, I had to work today. (Boo.) Now let's get on to the postdictions, in order of their likelihood.
1. The weather was crappy. No, I haven't seen a meteorological forecast. But this is Oregon. This is the second time the Pac-10 Cross Country Championships have been run at Oregon. I was there for the first time. I was a freshman. An hour before the race it started pouring. Then it got super-windy. I think it was in the 40s. I remember feeling very cold, rain hitting my eyeballs when I opened them, hating myself for not being able to keep up with anyone, and finishing 51st out of 56 runners.
The crazy thing is there were a bunch of crazy Oregonians lining the entire course, ringing cowbells and cheering for us. I had socks on my hands (seriously) which I threw off at the 3 1/2 mile mark (I had to do something!) as if that would help me focus and run faster. It didn't. But a nice old man brought them to me after the race and said he thought it would be a shame to have run a bad race and lost my socks. Thank you old man from Oregon.
(Update: Actually the weather held up. But then again, I live in California, so the weather was still crappy.)
2. Crazy Oregonians were out in full force. Actually, I think I already used up my justification for this. Shoot.
(Update: Yep. Galen Rupp compared it to a football game. Now that's some kinda crazy.)
3. Galen Rupp wasn't challenged significantly. I don't see Galen Rupp being pushed too hard today. Maybe Kiptoo could do it if they run as a team up front, but Stanford's Heath isn't in Rupp's league and Derrick is too young. But this leads me to another postdiction.
(Update: I rocked this postdiction. Me and everyone else in the world.)
4. Chris Derrick surprised a lot of people with his performance. Did he run as well as he could have? Is he the next great Stanford distance runner? Did it change people's opinions about who is the best freshman in college right now, Derrick or German Fernandez? Are these questions sufficiently ambiguous to be interpreted positively or negatively, depending on the outcome? I thought so. (By the way, here's an interview with Chris.)
(Update: I think Derrick may have surprised a couple people, but the real surprise was Luke Puskedra! What a gutsy way to run that race! Could he be stronger than German Fernandez right now? Even after German won his Big 12 Championship?)
5. UCLA looked good again. After their 5th place showing at Pre-Nationals (8th best when races were combined), UCLA finally looks like they've put together a competitive team on the national level. It's interesting that it's happened without the help of a star recruit (Mike Cybulski) and after losing their top guy (and perennial frontrunner), Austin Ramos. And when there was nobody left on the team with any connection to me...
(Update: Darn Laef Barnes! If he'd finished where he should have (top 15) the Bruins would have been a solid 3rd and my prediction would have been spot on. Instead he finished 46th, UCLA scored 20+ more points than they should have and they lost to Cal! Crap.)
6. Cal disappointed. I have a theory about Cal. Their team performs in inverse relation to how well Stanford performs. That is, when Stanford runs great, Cal underachieves. When Stanford struggles, Cal seems to step it up. Of course, this is a nonsense theory that I just made up on the spot. And maybe I just like predicting negative things for Cal. But then again...
(Update: Well, I blame Stanford for messing this up. If Stanford had done just a little better, I'm sure Cal would have taken a (disappointing) 5th. Alas.)
7. I didn't know anything about the other teams. My clairvoyance failed me, particularly with regard to the Arizona teams. Must be the desert heat.
(Update: Spot on postdiction. I must have a gift.)
8. It was all Huskies on the women's side. I read that the Huskies didn't even run one of their top girls at Pre-Nats and they dominated. They seem to be as deep a women's squad as I've ever seen. Another dominant performance today.
(Update: I am a genius.)
9. Greg Metcalf was the smilingest coach there. No way to verify this, except that his women's team will run well and he's a pretty happy guy as it is. Add to that the fact that the weather will actually be considered nice for him and there you go.
(Update: I am smarter than a genius.)
10. Alas, no lady Bruins cracked the top 30. I actually don't know as much about the women's team (or conference) as I would normally, but I do know one thing. UCLA's women's team isn't very strong this year. I don't see anyone cracking the top 30, and I'm going to give only 60% odds that anyone breaks 35. I'm not high on the Lady Bruins this year.
(Update: I am the smartest man alive. The top Bruin finisher was Shelby Buckley in 48th. Their 5th scorer was 77th. That means entire 'B' teams were finishing in front of UCLA's scorers. What's happened to that team?)
So there you go, 10 postdictions for a full Pac-10 Championships postview. The first of its kind. (And, no doubt, the last...)
For more great conference previews, check out The Meat Grinder at Trackshark.